Does anyone care about THIS?

Posted on by
Chopping birds to pieces in the name of Gaia.

Chopping birds to pieces in the name of Gaia.

How Do Wind Turbines Kill Birds?

Wind energy is frequently touted as a clean, green source of energy that can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.

But like all sources of energy, wind power comes at a cost — one that’s too often borne by eagles, hawks, falcons, owls and other birds.

Wind turbines kill more than 573,000 birds each year in the United States, according to The Associated Press, including federally protected species like bald eagles and golden eagles.

Environmentalists don’t care about anything but killing off people. Maybe Matt Damon should make a movie about that. He can ride to the rescue in his Toyota Prius. Or blow up in it. I don’t care which.

Sorry about that. Had an incident today with a right lane bandit in a Prius. They’re still in a hurry, mind. They just assume they have the right of way. Because they’re, you know, liberal.

As for me, right lane bandits are the same old cowardly scum they’ve always been. Too yellow to speed in the open, too stupid to understand how they put other people in danger by racing in the slow lane. In short, Democrats.

Windmills are a blight. They’re ugly and inefficient. They kill thousands, hundreds of thousands, of the most beautiful creatures on earth. Green? I don’t think so. Black is the color of Greenpeace and PETA. Death is their signpost.

This pic is really kind of perfect. The totalitarian cage they want all of us to live in.

Yeah. Let's all be cows owned by the state.

Yeah. Let’s all be cows owned by the state.

11 thoughts on “Does anyone care about THIS?”

  1. I actually don’t find them ugly. I like certain aspects about them. I’ve seen them in the mountains, both Berkshires and Poconos, and I find them interesting.

    But you’re right about the birds. Did you see this story on the white-throated needletail killed in front of enthusiastic birdwatchers?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO5LjgIEofg

    I would consider myself an environmentalist, but I will have nothing to do with the awful environmental movement.

    And before you ask (if you were going to), no, I’m not anti-coal, anti-car, anti any of it. I just like the possibilities of new modern energy. I don’t think wind power is much more than a blip, and I’d hate to see the country covered in them, but I don’t find them to be the blight that you do. Have you seen them up close?

  2. Don’t need to see them. They are a phenomenal waste of space, and they ARE ugly. Bird killing scythes. Sorry. Can’t agree with you on this one. Groan.

  3. I’m with you on the birds. But is there no place on Earth for them? I mean yes, they are horribly inefficient compared to just burning something, and yes, they kill birds. I’m against them on those counts.

    I just don’t mind the look of them is all. Let me ask you this: is there some style, some aesthetic, some shape that would make this kind of thing appealing to you? I mean, you like cars with curves, yes? But not *purely* curves, we know that.

    How do you feel about solar farms?

  4. Democrats don’t want anyone to have cheap, plentiful energy. The windmill thing is BS just like ethanol & solar power. The only people who come out on top are the ones who get the gov’t contracts & subsidies involved until the program is finally scrapped (if it ever is). I saw a recent article about Arizona granting so many subsidies for solar power users that some don’t actually pay any bills while regular users are having huge rate increases…because someone has to pay for the electricity used at night (and on cloudy days).

    We have a great, futuristic power source: it’s called nuclear. Thanks to Democrats, though, that’s as much of a dirty word as oil is.

    PS – what is a right lane bandit? Down here we have left lane squatters: people who drive 20 MPH under the speed limit in the fast lanes.

    • Yes, that’s the sad fact: all the interesting stuff that I like about the new technology and advances in harnessing raw natural element has been grabbed and bastardized and politicized by the left. None of these ‘renewables’ provide anything close to what this country needs for power, and we have plenty of good options — oil, coal, natural gas via fracking, all of it. And especially nuclear. Do you have 5 minutes? Have you seen the potential of thorium nuclear? China’s there or almost there. That could have been us. We could have had this. I think this could be the way, some technical hurdles aside.

      But just so we’re all on the same page, you two don’t actually have a problem with the notion of tapping into wind and solar energy, right? Technologically, apart from all the politics crap. Or are the two so mixed that you would rather just toss the proverbial baby out?

      • I don’t have a problem with wind or solar as long as the gov’t is not subsidizing them or shoving them down people’s throats. I just don’t think there’s any evidence either of those technologies are commercially viable. The whole idea behind the gov’t interference is to artificially inflate the cost of how we get electricity now, as if there are ways to make wind & solar better than nuclear, coal or gas but we just haven’t bothered thinking of them yet, but making the cost of living incredibly expensive will jump start inventors into coming up with something.

        Of course, that’s not how it works. If you told me to build an airplane out of a cardboard box and a rubber band, then put a gun to my head and gave me two minutes, I can guarantee you’d end up pulling the trigger. Some things are simply not possible, and I think making sunshine & blowing wind as powerful as the output from one nuclear reactor is one of those impossible things.

        But if some private investor wants to take their own time & money to prove me wrong, hey, I’m all for it. I just don’t want them using my money, is all, or having the gov’t seize land on their behalf for their experimental windmill farm.

  6. All energy is nuclear. My car runs on nuclear power. Nuclear power that was stored by plants. And buried for a few million years.

    Windmills run on nuclear power. They’re spun by air warmed by the freaking huge nuke plant at the center of the solar system.

    Just say “No!” to second-hand energy. Get it from the source.

    (BTW, Lake, thanks for the LFTR link. That tech sounds fantastic. Why aren’t we already doing this???)

  7. People want to discuss power production and associated methods because it is simplistic and romantic. But the consumption of power is where real gains can be made; by introducing more efficient systems we can reduce our need for contrivances such as windmills.

    So if we need to grind wheat and corn we can do so with completely harmless low-velocity windmills such as the Dutch used and Don Quixote battled. This will mean that no electrical power will be required.

    We can also reuse our glass bottles. There is no more energy-intensive industry than that which manufactures glass. It is a monumental waste not reuse our bottles.

    I guess what I am saying is that if we live more responsibly and perhaps with a little less convenience we might be able to do away with much of this ugly and psychologically oppressive infrastructure.

    I know that I am dreaming; America will not give up once second of convenience even if it meant we could get rid of all the windmills and nuke plants. No way. We are the children of Rome. How else can I possibly describe us?

Comments are closed.